undue influence€¦ · web viewvitiating factors, contracts in restraint of trade, remedies,...
TRANSCRIPT
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI SCHOOL OF LAW
GPR 108 CONTRACTS II
COURSE CONTENT
Vitiating factors, Contracts in Restraint of trade, Remedies, Discharge of contract, quasi-contract; interaction of tort and contract, and conflict of laws, Contracts I is a prerequisite.
POSSIBLE READING
1. Chitty on Contracts (2004), Volume I, General Principles Volume II, Specific Contracts Thomson, Sweet and Maxwell, London.
2. Richards, Paul (2002) Law of Contract, Dorset Press, Dorchester
3. J.C. Smith. (1998). The Law of Contract: Fundamental Principles of Law”, 3rd ed. London, Sweet and Maxwell.
4. Trietel G. H. (2003). The Law of Contract Thomson, Sweet and Maxwell.
5. Atiyah, P. S. (4995) An Introduction to the Law of Contract (5th ed.) Clarendon Law series, Oxford.
6. Beale, H. Bishop, W. et al (1990). Contract: Cases and Materials. (2nd e.d) Buttersworth, London.
7. Smith, J.C.& Thomas J (1982). A Case book on Contract 7th ed. London, Sweet and Maxwell.
8. Hodgin, R.W. (1975) Law of Contract in East Africa. Kenya Literature Bureau.
1
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
TOPIC ONE: VITIATING FACTORS/FAULTS IN CONTRACTS
Effects of faults in Contracts Void – mistake, illegal contracts Voidable – misrepresentation and capacity Unenforceable – absence of some requirement,
e.g. written evidence.
Vitiating Factors1. Misrepresentation2. Mistake3. Duress4. Undue influence5. Illegal contracts
TOPIC 2: DISCHARGE OF CONTRACTSTOPIC 3: REMEDIES
TOPIC 1 : VITIATING FACTORS
A. DURESS
Introduction
Royal Bank of Scotland V Etridge (No.2) (2001) 4 All ER 499.
Threats to a person is obvious form of duress Economic duress
The siboen and The sibotre (occidental worldwide Investment Corp V Skibs A/S Avanti) 1976
2
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Atlas Express Ltd V Kafco (Importers and Distributors) Ltd ., 1989
Language of the courts “Voluntariness”, “Consent” and “Overborne will”
Truly unwilled action is not relevant. DPP for Northern Ireland V Lynch (1975)
Real question is whether decision was made in unacceptable circumstances, Dimskal shipping Co., S.A. V International Transport Workers Federation, The Evia Luck (1991) 4 All ER 871
The test for the Existence of duress Circumstances under which he decided to contract. Whether other party had introduced an
unacceptable element into those circumstances. Enimont Overseas AG V Rojugotanker Zadar, The Olib, (1991)2 Llyd’s Reg. 108
Illegitimacy of the threat, Universe Tankships Inc. of Monrovia V International Transport Workers Federation and Laughton (1983) 1 AC 366
Act is unlawful if criminal and or civil wrong e.g. branch of contract or tort.
> In principle it is possible for duress to be based in a lawful threat.
CTN cash and carry Ltd V Gallaher, (1994) 4 All ER. 714.
> Lack of reasonable alternative. Second requirement where threat is not a
criminal offence Pao On V Lau Yiu Long (1980) AC 614, Universe Tankships Inc of Monrovia
V International Transport workers Federation (1983) AC 366. B & S Contracts and Design Ltd V Victor
3
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
green Publications Ltd. (1984) 1 CR 419
“reasonable alternative” Vantage Navigation Corp. V Suhail and Saud Bahwan Building materials, The Alev (1989) 1 Llyd rep. 138
practical alternatives” What constitutes a reasonable
alternative? Criticism of the reasonable alternative
test- an alternative?> Did the person make the threat out of malice or bad faith?
Why a two stage test when a legal wrong has been threatened?
- Security of transactions- Balancing of competing interests- In criminal offence alternatives test
inappropriate,- Barton V Armstong (1976)- Is the duress operative?- To what degree did the threat induce
the contract?, Barton V Armstong- Threat significant cause of the
contract. - The Evia luck (1992) 2 AC 152
RescissionRight to rescind may be lost by affirmationNorth Ocean shipping V Hyundai Construction Co. Ltd., (1978) 3 ALL ER. 1170
B. UNDUE INFLUENCE
Introduction4
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Overlap between duress and undue influence Subtle difference based on relationship between the
parties. Royal Bank of Scotland V Eltridge (No.2) (2001)
4 ALL ER 449 Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch. D 15 Actual and presumed undue influence.Barclays Bank PLC v O’Brien (1963) 4 All ER 417 Modern context of use of undue influence (loan
guarantee by wife to husband) The right to rescind may be lost by affirmation
Allcard v Skinner (1887)
Actual undue influence Inappropriate exercise of influence arising out of the
relationship.Royal Bank of Scotland V Etridge (No.2) 2001 4
All ER 449 Bank of Credit and Commerce International
S.A. V. Aboody (1989) Fam. Law 435 Absence of malign intent to cause detriment
irrelevant.
Presumed Undue Influence The types of presumptions (Type 2A and Type 2B) Equity and the presumption of influence in special
category of relationships. Presumed as a mater of law not just evidentially second presumption that is, that influence was
exercised is an evidential presumption. Second must relate to the transaction and can be
rebutted. 2nd type: Relationship between the parties involved
relevant influence
5
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
- relationship of trust and confidence – fiduciary relationship.
Transaction must be one that ‘calls for an explanation’
Relationship between banker and customer Lloyds Bank Ltd V Bundy (1974) 3 All ER. 757.National Westminister Bank PLC V Morgan (1985) 1 All ER 821
Transaction readily explicable as normal commercial loan
No requirement of ‘dominating influence’ Goldsworthy V Brickell (1987) 1 All ER 853
Transactions calling for an explanationAllcard V Skinner
Large gift Manifest Disadvantage National Westminister V
Morgan Husband guarantees
Difficulty in generating presumption of undue influence in husband and wife guarantee type of cases.Royal Bank V Etridge
Rebutting the presumption of undue influence Free, full informed choice Zamet V Hyman (1961) 3
All ER 933Inche Noriah V Shaik Allie Bin Omar (1929) AR 127
Weight to be attached to independent advice Royal Bank of Scotland V Etridge
Undue influence and third parties Examples from husband and wife situation, but not
limited to this. Barclays Bank PLC V O’Brien (1993) 4 All ER 417
“Agency relationship” 6
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
“Constructive Notice”
“Put on inquiry”o transaction not to financial advantage of wife.o Substantial risk in transactions.
Situations outside the husband and wife context and outside context
surety transactions. Massey V Midland Bank PLC (1995)
Where couples not cohabiting Where relationship between debtor and surety is
non-commercial Constructive notice CIBC Mortgages V Pitt (1993) What can third parties do to prevent itself being
fixed with constructive notice?Barclays Bank V O’Brien
Confirmation by solicitor UCB Corporate Services Ltd V Williams (2002)“appropriate advice”
Exceptional circumstances Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland NV-V-Burch. (1997) 1 All ER 144.
Other relevant cases. Hodgins R. W. Law of Contract.
Hassanali Issa and Co. V Jeraj Produce Store !967 E.A. 55
H.C. Pater V Pankay 5 Thakora (1965) EA 629Ottoman Bank V K. S. (1965) EA. 464.
C. MISTAKE
Introduction Common mistake Mutual mistake
7
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Unilateral mistake
Are contractual obligations absolute or can a party escape liability?Narrow meaning of word “mistake” in contract law.
Clarion Ltd V National Provident Institution (2000) Law takes a predominantly objective of agreement
Controvincial Estates Plc V Merchant Investors Assurance Co. Ltd (1983) Com LR 158
A. Agreement Mistakes Mistakes as to identity(unilateral mistake)
Shogun Finance Ltd V Hudson (2003) All ER (D) 258
Identity or attributes? Cundy V Lindsay (1878)3 App. Cas. 459Kings Norton Metal Co. V Edridge, Merret & Co. (1897) 14 TLR 98“Is the distinction between identity and attributes not genuine”? Lewis V Avery (1972) IQB 198 Shegun Finance Ltd V Hudson
> Parties dealing face to facePhillips V Brooks Ltd. (1919) 2 ICB 243 Lake V Simmons (1927) AC. 487, IngramV Little (1961) 1 QB 31
Should the law permit some division of loss between two innocent parties? Lewis V Averay Shogun Finance V Hudson
> Mistake as to the terms or subject matter of a contract (mutual mistake)
> Objective principles in relation to parties at cross purposes Raffles V Wichelhaus (1864) 2
8
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
H & C 906 Scriven Bros V Hindley & Co. (1913) 3 KB. 564. Smith V Hughes (1871) LR. 6. QB. 592
> Agreement mistake in equity- equitable jurisdiction permits a more flexible approach. Malins V Freemen (1837) Steward V Kennedy (1890) 15 App. Co. 75.
Patel V Ali (1984) Ch. 283 where the court refused to grant specific performance which is a discretienary remedy, on equitable grounds of hardship to the dependant. The vendor of the house had, since the sale, become disabled and heavily dependent for help on neighbours whom she would lose if she had to move. Goolding J. refused to grant specific performance, leaving the purchasers to their remedy in damages.
Court will not allow defendant to escape performance simply because he made a mistake. Tamplin V James (1879) 15 Ch. D. 215
Rectification is a another equitable remedy. Joscelyne V Nissen (1970) 2 QB 86 Riverside Properties Ltd., V Paul (1975) Ch. 133. Commission for the New Towns V Cooper (GB) Ltd. (1995) Oceanic Village V. Shirayama Shokusan Co. Ltd. (1999)
B Common Mistake
Performability Mistake or Initial impossibility. Mistake as to existence of subject matter.
Galloway V Galloway (1914) Couturier V Hastie (1856) 5 HL Case 673
9
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Assumption of risk of goods non-existent. McRae V Commonwealth Disposals Commission (1951) 84 CLR 377 Barrow, lane & Ballard Ltd V. Phillips & Co. Ltd. 1929 1 KB 574
Mistake as to quality of subject matterGreat peace shipping Ltd V Tsauliris salvage (International) Ltd 2003) QB. 679Bell V Lever Bros 1932 AC. 161
Mistake as to the existence of some quality which makes the thing without the quality essentially different. Associated Japanese Bank (International) V Credit du Nord Strict view of mistake at common Law. Leaf V
International Galleries (1950) 2 KB 86 but see Associated Japanese Bank (International) V Credit do Nord SA:
A doctrine of common mistake of common lawThe scope of common mistake. Great Peace Shipping Ltd. V Tsauliris Salvage (International) Ltd., (2002) EWCA AU. 1407 (2003) QB 679
Common Mistake in equity, William Sandall Plc V Cambridgeshire County Council (1994)
Contracts merely liable for setting aside in equity? Solle V Butcher (1950 1 KB 671 Bell V Lever Bros Great Peace Shipping
Further attempt to develop an equittable approach Grist V Bailey (1967) Ch. 532
Documents signed by Mistake – L’Estrange V Graucobs________(1934) KB 394
10
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Non Est Factum – not my deed. Thoroughgood’s Case (1582) Foster V Mackinnon (1869) LR. 4 CP. 704
Use of defence of non est factum strictly limited. Saunders V Anglia Building Society (Gallie V Lee) 1971) AC 1004
Party cannot rely on the defence where she acted carelessly. United Dominions Trust Ltd V Western (1976) QB 513
Where document radically different from what it was supposed to be. Lloyds Bank PlC V Waterhouse (1990)
D. MISREPRESENTATION
Introduction
Operative misrepresentation Who can one claim remedy for misrepresentation? Misrepresentation can be innocent, fraudulent and
negligent Remedies are found in common law, equity and
statute law (Trade Description Act CAP) No general duty to disclose relevant facts in pre-
contract negotiations Misrepresentation must be false statement of fact
not opinion or intention. Edginton v. Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 ch. D 459
statement of opinion Bisset v. Wilkinson (1927) AC 177
Statement of person in better position to know the truth Smith v. Land and House Property Corporation (1884) 28 ch. D 7
Brown V. Raphael (1958) 11
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Statement of expert Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd. Marden (1976)
No general duty to disclose Turner v. Green (1895)
Partial non-disclosure Motts Patent Brick and Tile Co. (1886)
Change of circumstances with V O’Flanagan (1936) ch. 575
Change of intention Traill V Baring (1864) Fiduciary or confidential relationships (covered
under undue influence) – duty to disclose material facts
Misrepresentation by conduct Ray v. Sampers (1974) R V Charles (1977)
When is misrepresentation operative? Parties to the contract Reliance Smith v Chadwick (1884) Where reasonable person would have relied upon
misrepresentation County Natwest v. Barton (2002)
Where misrepresentation is not known about Horsfall v. Thomas (1862)
Where representee relies upon his own investigations Attwood v. small (1838)
Where opportunity to discover truth not taken. Redgrave v. Hurd (1881)
Degree of reliance Edginton v. Fitzmaurice (1885)
Atlantic lines and Navigation Co. Inc. v. Hallam Ltd “The Way” (1983)
Materiality
Types of misrepresentation
12
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Fraudulent misrepresentation Derry v. Deek (1889) 14 App Case 337Arkerhielm v. De Mark (1959) Ac 789
Jewson & Sons Ltd. v. Arcos Ltd (1933) Damages for fraudulent misrepresentation Negligent misstatements Hedley Byrne &
Co. Ltd. v. Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) Innocent misrepresentation Rescission Car and Finance Ltd v. Caldwell
(1965) Indemnity Whittington v. Seale –Hayne (1990) Trade Descriptions Act CAP 505 Laws of Kenya
E. ILLEGALITY
Introduction Illegal contracts divided on the basis on the legal
consequences of those contracts (e.g. void or illegal)
A. VOID CONTRACTS
Gaming or wagering contracts Gaming laws Ellesmere (Ear of v. Wallace (1929) 2 ch. I
1. Contracts in Restraint of Trade
Prima facie void unless justified as being reasonable between the parties and not inimical to the public interest
Examples of ‘goodwill’ and employment agreements Schroeder Music Publishing Co. Macaulay (1974) 3 All ER 616
Restraint may be reasonable and commercially necessary for protection of legitimate interest
13
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Nordenfelt v. Maxin Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunitions Co. Ltd.(1894) Ac 535
Sale of business Nordenfelt Vancouver Malt and Sake Brewing Co. Ltd v. Vancouver Breweries Co. Ltd. (1934) Ac 181
Court willing to sever parts which might be too wide in area or period Goldsoll v. Goldman (1915) 1 Ch 292
Restraints in a contract of employment
Protection of trade secrets and confidential information
Distinction between trade secret and confidential information Fss Travel & Leisure Systems Ltd v. Johnson (1998) I RLR 382 Herbert Morris Ltd v. Saxelby (1916) AC 688
What constitutes a trade secrets? Forsters & Sons Ltd v. Suggett (1918) 35 TLR 87
Faccanda Chicken Ltd v. Fowler (1987) Ch. 177 Peter Brooks v. Olyslager Oms (UK) Ltd (1998) 1 PLR 590
Commercial Plastics Ltd v. Vincent (1965) 1 QB 623
Littlewoods organization Ltd v. Harris (1978) 1 ALL ER 1026 Kores Manufacturing Co. Ltd v. Kolok Manufacturing (Ltd) (1958) Ch. 108
Clauses restraining soliciting of customers Distinction between different categories of
employees Fitch v. Dewes (1921) 2AC 158 Marion White Ltd v. Francis (1972) 3 ALL ER
857 The scope of restraint clause and severance
Fitch v. Suggett Mason v. Provident Clothing & Supply Co. Ltd. (1913) Ac. 724
Attwood v Lament (1920) 3 KB 57114
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
What are the requirements for severance? Goldsoll v. Goldman Littlewoods Organisation v. Harris 1 ALL ER 1026
Restraints protecting other interests Eastham v. Newcastle United Football Club Ltd. (1964) Ch 413
Schroeder Music Publishing co. Ltd v. Macaulay (1974) 13 ALL ER 616
Silverstone Records v. Mountfield (1993) EMLR 152
Are the categories of restraint closed? Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd v. Harpers Garage (Stouport) Ltd
Further regulation of Restraint of trade A third party might be seriously affected by a
restraint of trade but, has, until recently, been entirely without remedy. Mogul Steamship Co. Ltd v. McGreger, Gow & Co. Ltd. (1892)
In this case an association of shipowners took collective action to keep the plaintiff out of the shipping trade. At that time, the House of Lords was not even certain that the contract was in restraint of trade. However they were clear that even if it was, the plaintiff had no remedy
Restrictive Trade Practices, Monopolies and Price control Act CAP 504 Laws of Kenya
2. OTHER CONTRACTS VOID AT COMMON LAW ON GROUNDS OF
PUBLIC POLICY
Contracts to oust the jurisdiction of the courts Jones v. Vernons Pools Ltd (1938( 2 ALL ER 626
Scott v. Avery (1855) 5 HL Cas 8115
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Baker v. Jones (1954) 1 WLR 1005 Hyman v. Hyman (1929) P1, 26 LGR 471 Contracts undermining the status of
marriage Love v. Peers (1768) 4 Burr 2225 Marriage brokerage Hermann v. Charles worth
(1905) 2 KB 123
B ILLEGAL CONTRACTS
Distinction between void and illegal contracts Contracts to commit an unlawful Act Where purpose to commit, a crime, or a tort or a
fraud it is illegal and unforceable. Brown Jenkinson & Co. Ltd. v. Percy Dalfen ltd (1957) 2 QB 621
A guilty person may be able to enforce the contract Shaw v. Groom (1970)
Re Mohmound and Isphani(1921) Contracts promoting sexual immorality
Pearce v. Brooks (1866) v. LR 1 Ex 213 Upfill v. Wright [1911] 1 KB 506
Tanner v. Tanner (1975) 3 ALL ER 776 Contracts prejudicial to the interests of the
state Trading contracts at war time Contracts prejudicial to the administration of
justice R v. Andrews (1973) QB 422 Contracts promoting corruption in Public life
Parkison v. College of Ambulance Ltd and Harrison (1925) 2 KB 1
EFFECTS OF IMPROPRIETY AND ILLEGALITY
Void Contracts Doctrine of severance
16
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Hermann v. Charles Worth (1905) 2 KB 123
Illegal ContractsRe Mohmound and Ispahani Archbold’s (Freightage) Ltd v. Spangett Ltd (1961) 1 Q3 374 Ashmore, Benson, Pease & Co. Ltd v. AV Dawson Ltd (1973) 2 ALL ER 856
Some general principles An illegal contract is unforceable by
either party Pearce v. Brooks Mohammed v. Alaga & Co. (1999) 3
ALL ER 699 Money or property transferred is not
recoverable Parkinson v. College of Ambulance Ltd & Harrison
Belvoir Finance Co. Ltd. v. Stapleton (1971) 1 QB 210
ExceptionsTinsley v. Milligan (1993) 3 ALL ER 65Whenever parties are not equally guilty Kiriri Cotton Ltd v. Dewani (1960) AC 192Green v. Portsmouth Stadium Ltd (1953) 2QB 190Bigos v. Bousted (1951) 1 All ER 92Kearly v. Thomson (1890) 24 QBD 742
Related transactions between the partiesFisher v. Bridges (1854) 18 JP 599 Strongman (1945) Ltd v. Sincock (1955) 2 QB 525
Illegal performance of lawful contractsArchbold’s (Freightage) Ltd v. Spanglett LtdMarle v. Philip Trant & Sons Ltd (1954)1 QB 29
17
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Proposals for reform
TOPIC TWO: DISCHARGE OF CONTRACT
1. PERFORMANCE
Performance depends on the express ad implied terms of the contract
Sale of Goods Act CAP 31 implied Terms – Sec 14-17 to title description, merchantability
Parties may agree to end upon the occurrence of certain circumstances. Financings Ltd. v. Baldock (1963) 2 QB 104 “Where hirer fails to pay the initial or any subsequent installments within 10 days…”
By new Agreements
Order of performance and independent obligationTaylor v. Webb (1937) 2KB 283Entire contracts Cutter v. Powell (1795) 6 Term
Rep. 320 Quantum Meruit Sumpter v. Hedges (1898) 1 QB
673 Substantial performance Hoening v. Isaacs (1952)
2 ALL ER 176
2. BREACH
TERMINATION FOR BREACH
Hong Kong for Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd (1962) 2 QB 26
Freeth v. Burr (1874) LR 9 CP 208
18
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Alfred C Toepfer International Gmbtt v. Itex Itagrani Export SA (1993) 1 Lloyd Rep. 360 Decro-wall International SA V Practitioner Marketing Ltd (1971) 2 ALL ER 216
Photo production Ltd. v. Securior Transport Ltd ( 1980) 1 Ailer 556
The Mihalis Angelos (1971) 1 QB 164 Anticipatory breach Freeth v. Burr (1874) LR
94208 Hashamu v. Zenab (1960) AC 316 Communication of repudiation Vitol SA v. Norelf
Ltd (1996) 3 ALL ER 193 Affirmation or termination Stocznia Gdanska SA V
Latuian Shipping (No.3) (2002) 2 ALL ER 768 Hochster v. De La Tour (1853) 2 E & B 678
Frost v. Knight (1872) 7 Exch. 111 Intention not to perform Federal Commerce and
Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Molena Alpha Inc (1979) 1 ALL ER 307 Woodwar Investment Development Ltd. v. Wimpey Construction UK Ltd. (1980) 1 ALL ER 571
Vaswani v. Italian motors (sales and services) ltd (1996_ 1 WLR 270
Keeping the contract alive Avery v. Bowden (1856) 6 E & B 953 Fercometal SARL v. MSC Meditterranean Shipping Cp. SA (1988) The Simona (1989) AC 788 The Mihalis Angelos
Anticipayory breach and duty to mitigate White and Carter (Councils ) Ltd v. McGregor (19662) AC 413
The Alaskan Trader (Clea shipping corpn v. Bulk oil International Ltd) (1984)
19
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
3. DISCHARGE BY IMMPOSSIBILITY: THE DOCTRINE OF FRUSTRATION
Introduction: Initial & subsequent impossibility Amalgamated Investment & Property Co. Ltd.
v. John Walker & Sons Ltd (1976) 3 ALL ER 509 Development of the doctrine of frustration
Paradine v. Jane (1647) 26 Sty 47 Taylor v. Caldwell (1863) 3 B & S 826 Scope of doctrine Krell v. Henry (1903) 2 KB 70 A narrow interpretation of frustration Herne Bay
Steamboat Co. v. Hutton (1903) 2 KB 683 Tsakiroglou & Co. Ltd v. Noblee Thorl GmbH 1
(1962) Financial hardship no reason to allow reliance on
frustration Davis contractors Ltd v. Fareham UDC (1956) AC 696
Scope of the doctrine
Leases National carriers Ltd. v. Panalpina (Northern) Ltd [1981] 1 ALL ER 161
Illegality Impossibility: destruction of subject matter
Appleby v. Myers (1867) LR 2 CP 651 Asfar v. Blundell (1896) 1 QB 123 Impossibility: Sale of Goods Act Impossibility: death or illness whincup v. Hughes
(1871) LR 6 CP 78 Robinson v. Davison (1871) LR 6 Exch 269 Notcutt v. Universal Equipment Co. (London)
Ltd (1986) 3 ALL ER 582
20
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Impossibility: due to unavailability Jackson v. Union Marine Insurance Co. Ltd. (1874) LR 10 CP 125
Tamplin steamship co. Ltd Anglo-Mexican Petroleum Products co. (1916) 1 KB 485
Impossibility: Not just financial hardship Davis contractors Ltd v. Fareham UDC (1956) AC 696
Tsakiroglou & Co. Ltd v. Noble Thorl GmbH(1962)
Staffordshire Area Health Authority v. South Staffordshire Water Works Co. (1978 (3 ALL ER 769
Effects of express provisions for frustrating event Taylor v. Caldwell Jackson v. Union Marine Insurance Co. Ltd (1874) LR 10 CP 125
Frustration does not apply to forseeable events. Davis Contractors Ltd. v. Fareham UDC (1956) AC 696
Frustration cannot be self induced Ocean Tramp Tankers Corp v. V/O Sofracht, The Eugenia (1964) 2 QB 226
Paal Wilson Co. A/S v. Partenreederei Hannah Blumenthal, The Hannah Blumenthal (1983) 1 ALL ER 34
Joseph Constantine Steamship line Ltd. v. Imperial Smelting Corp Ltd. (1941) 2 ALL ER 165
Effects of the doctrine Hirji Mulji V Cheong Yue Steamship Co. Ltd. (1926) AC 497 Chandler v. Webster (1904) 1 KB 493 Fibrosa Spolka Akcyjna Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbou
r Ltd, The Fibrosa case (1943) AC 32 The Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 Main changes introduced by the Act.
21
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Gamerco SA V. ICM/ Fair Warning (Agency) Ltd (1995) 1 WLR 1226 Cutter v. Powell (1795) 6 Term rep 320
BP Exploration co (Libya) Ltd v. Hunt (no.2) (1982) 1 ALL ER 925
TOPIC 3 REMEDIES
INTRODUCTION
1. Damages Expectation loss Livingstone v. Rawyards Coal
(1880) 5 App/ Cas 25
Measure of damages Under Sale of Goods Act “Cost of cure” Radford v. De froberville (1977)
(WLR) 1262 Time of breach Johnson v. Agnew (1979) 1 ALL ER
883 Suleman v. Shahshavari (1989) 2 ALL ER 460
Reliance Loss (1971) 3 ALL ER 690 Anglia Television Ltd v Reed C and P Haulage v. Middleton (1983) 1 WLR
1461 Pre-contract expenditure Anglia Television v.
Reed (1972) 1 QB 60
Restitution
Enrichment by wrong Rowland v. Divall (1923) 2 KB 500
22
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Enrichment by substraction Wrotham Park Estate Co. v. Parkside Homes Ltd (1974) 1 WLR 798
Damages for mental distress Addis v.Gramophone co. Ltd (1909) AC 488 Watts v. Morrow (1991) 4 ALL ER 937 Farley v. Skinner (2001) Uktth 49 Perry v. Sidney Phillips & Sons(1982) 3 All ER
705 Watts v. Morrow (1991) 4 ALL ER 937 Heywood v. Wellers (1976) QB 446 Hayes v. James & Charles Dodd(1990) 2 ALL ER
815
Remoteness of Damage Test for Remoteness Hadley v. Baxendale (1854)
9 Exch. 34 Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v. Newman
Industries Ltd. (1949) 1 ALL ER 997 Reasonable forseeability Heron II (Koufos v.
(Zarnikow Ltd) (1960) 1 AC 350
Contract/Tort distinction and type of loss H Parsons (Livestock) Ltd. v. Ottley & Co. Ltd.
(1978) 1 ALL ER 525 Economic justification for remoteness rule Need for an additional requirement?
Causation and Liability Intervening acts and events Monarch steamship
co Ltd. v. A/B Karlshamns Olje Fabriker (1949) AC 196
London Joint Stock Bank v. MacMillan (1918) AC 777
Mitigation
23
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
British Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Underground Electric Railways Co. of London (1912) AC 673
Sotiros Shipping Inc v. Sameiet Solholt, The Solholt 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 605
Reasonable steps to limit loss James Finlay & Co. v. NU Kwik Hoo Tong HM
(1029) 1 KB 400 Brace v. Calder (1895) 2 QB 253
Expenses Incurred Banco de Portugal v. Waterlow & Sons
Ltd(1932) AC 452 Benefit gained is taken into account British
Westing house Electric Taxation British Transport commission v.
Gourley (1956) 2 WLR 41
Penalties and Liquidated damages Dunlop pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. co. Ltd v.
Garage and Motor (1915) AC 79 Philips Hong Kong Ltd. v. A-G of Hong Kong
(1993) 61 BLR 41
Avoidance of the rule on penalties Alder v. Moore (1961) 1 ALL ER 1 Bridge v.
Campbell Discount Co. Ltd (1962) AC 600
2. Action for an agreed sum White and Carter (Councils Ltd. v. McGregor
3. Specific Performance
Adequacy of damages Harnett v. Yielding (1805) 2 Sch. & Let. 549)
24
Rose Janet Ayugi-Masinde – Contracts II Course Outline
Beswick v. Beswick (1968) AC 58 Rainbow Estates Ltd. v. Tokenhold Ltd. (1998) 2
ALL ER 860 Cud v. Rutter (1720) 2 Eq. Cas Abr. 18 Harvela Investments Ltd. v. Royal Trust Co. of
Canada (1985) Ch. 103 Falcke v. Gray (1859) 4 Drew 651 Behnke v. Bede shipping Co. Ltd. (1927) 1 KB
649 Beswick v. Bewick (1968) AC 58
Supervision Ryan v. Mutual Tontine Westminster Chambers
Association (1893) 1 C. 116
Personal Services Hill v. C A Parsons & Co. Ltd. (1972) Ch. 305 Powell v. Brent London Borough Council (1988)
1 CR 176
Discretion of courts to award to specific performance
Hardship Patel v. Ali (1984) 1 ALL ER 978
Consideration
Party Claiming specific performance Walter v. Morgan (1861) 3 De. 9F & J 718
Mutuality Price v. Strange (1977) 3 ALL ER 371
4. Injunctions
25